Violent behaviour on construction sites: structural equation modelling of its impact on unsafe behaviour using partial least squares

Abstract

<jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Purpose</jats:title><jats:p>Work on construction sites involves individuals with diverse character, temperament,age, physical strength, culture, religion and experience level. A good number of these individuals are also alleged to involve themselves in substance and alcohol abuse due to the physically demanding nature of their work. These could promote the prevalence of violence on construction sites which could in turn affect safety on construction sites. However, there is a lack of empirical insight into the effect of violent behaviour and unsafe behaviour on construction sites. This study therefore pioneers an empirical inquiry into the relationship between violent behaviour and unsafe behaviour on construction sites.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Design/methodology/approach</jats:title><jats:p>Seventeen violent behaviours and 15 unsafe behaviours were measured on 12 construction sites among 305 respondents using a structured questionnaire. A total of 207 valid questionnaire responses were collected from site workers. Partial least square–structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) technique was used to examine the relationship between violent behaviour and unsafe behaviour.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Findings</jats:title><jats:p>The results indicate that there is a significant positive relationship between violent behaviour and unsafe behaviour on construction sites.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Originality/value</jats:title><jats:p>The findings from this study provide valuable insight into a less investigated dimension of the problem of construction site safety management. A focus on attitudinal issues such as how workers relate toward others and toward self should be an important consideration in safety improvement interventions on construction sites.</jats:p></jats:sec>

A systematic review of construction safety research: quantitative and qualitative content analysis approach

“…Apart from safety roles, competencies, communication and climate, recent studies have tried to investigate the impact of stakeholders' safety archetypes using system dynamics and content analysis approach and the relationship between personality types and factors affecting the workers' safety behavior. However, an in-depth qualitative analysis of factors affecting safety behavior could be explored and an investigation of the relationship between violent and unsafe behavior among various trade groups could be explored for optimized efforts from management (Adinyira et al , 2020).…”

Formation Mechanism and Dynamic Evolution Laws About Unsafe Behavior of New Generation of Construction Workers Based on China’s Construction Industry: Application of Grounded Theory and System Dynamics

“…At the same time, the high level of mobility makes it more challenging for NGCWs to develop a sense of belonging to the team and trust in their leaders and fellow workers. Over time, they may accumulate unpleasant feelings and tend to engage in violent acts to vent their emotions, which can easily lead to unsafe behavior and eventually cause serious issues ( Adinyira et al, 2020 ).…”

An Integrated Safety, Health and Environmental Management Capability Maturity Model for Construction Organisations: A Case Study in Ghana

“…Therefore, existing capability maturity models like the UK Coal Journey Model by Foster and Hoult [17] and Risk Management Maturity Model (RM3) by the Office of Road and Rail, and Health and Safety Maturity [63] were reviewed to obtain the underlying notion of maturity for each of the SHE capability attributes. In summary, the cell texts were formulated using: (1) The underlying rationale of maturity of each capability attributes; and (2) The identification and the descriptions of the best and worst practices at the extreme ends of the scale (i.e., Level 1 and Level 5), such that Level 1 represented no or very low maturity and Level 5 represented the highest level of maturity which is also presented by reviews within the capability maturity model literature to ensure continuous improvement. Secondly, the other cell descriptors in between (i.e., levels 2, 3 and 4) were also deduced from the underlying notion and formulated accordingly.…”

“…The construction sector remains one of the key generators of adverse environmental impacts and is among one of the highest contributors of work-related accidents, resulting in injuries, fatalities, and illnesses [1][2][3]. For instance, in the USA, the construction sector accounted for over 800 worker-related deaths in 2019 [4].…”